[Bug 187799] Review Request: perl-Cairo - Perl interface to the cairo library

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: perl-Cairo - Perl interface to the cairo library


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187799





------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2006-04-21 15:07 EST -------
It's too bad about the test suite; maybe in the future we can figure out why it
won't work.

Issues:
rpmlint complains:
W: perl-Cairo devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/Cairo/Install/cairo-perl.h
W: perl-Cairo devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/Cairo/Install/cairo-perl-auto.h

I can't imagine it being worth it to split these to a -devel package, but the
packaging guidelines insist that they not be in the main package.  This seems to
be a perl thing, as other modules (DBI, Gtk-Perl, PDL, etc.) include header
files that aren't in devel packages.

So I'm inclined to approve, but I'll ask for clarification.

Review:
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and
conforms to the Perl template.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible and included in the package.
* source files match upstream:
   6ad0ab39eb8f56272373a9ea4515f37a  Cairo-0.03.tar.gz
   6ad0ab39eb8f56272373a9ea4515f37a  Cairo-0.03.tar.gz-srpm
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock.
X rpmlint complains about header files.
* final provides and requires are sane.
* a shared library is present, but it is internal to perl so ldconfig is not needed.
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
O %check is disabled.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
X headers are present and not in -devel package.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* not a GUI app.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.